Photo taken June, 2021
Licensees
No details available
Wednesday, 15 December 2021
Tin & Tap Rooms, 13-15, Rendezvous Street 2020 - October 2021
Above photos taken October, 2020
Licensees
No details Available
East Cliff Tavern 1900 - 1914
East Cliff Tavern c1908
Folkestone Chronicle
13-2-1904
Licensing Sessions
Wednesday, February 10th: Before Mr. W.
Wightwick, Alderman Herbert, Lieut. Cols. Fynmore, Westropp, and Hamilton,
Messrs. C.J. Pursey and E.T. Ward.
The Chief Constable (Mr. H. Reeve) read his annual report,
which contained interesting figures with regard to drunkenness, etc. No person
in Folkestone had yet been convicted a sufficient number of times to be placed
on the “black list”. The Chief Constable objected to the renewal of the licence
of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and asked that the consideration of this licence
might be deferred until the adjourned sessions.
The Chairman then read the Justices` Report, which stated
that the number of licensed houses in Folkestone, and especially around the
harbour, was out of all proportion to the population. The number of licences
had not been reduced, owing to the fact that a Bill amending the Licensing Laws
was shortly to be introduced in Parliament. Certain public houses – the
Imperial Brewery Tap, the Hope, the East Cliff Tavern, the Victoria, the
Lifeboat Inn, the Duke Of Edinburgh, and the Channel Inn had been inspected by
the Justices, and recommendations with regard to their sanitary improvement and
closing of back entries were made.
Mr. John Minter said that water had been laid on at the
Channel Inn since the report on the bad state of the sanitary arrangements. Mr.
Minter also suggested with regard to the Imperial Brewery Tap that a public bar
should be made with an entrance from Mill Bay.
The Bench decided, however, that the orders made in the
report should be adhered to.
Licences were then granted to the lessees of public houses
and licensed premises.
Mr. Minter applied for full licences for Mr. W.T. Tame and
Mr. Gregory, but no new facts were forthcoming and the Bench declined to grant
them, stating that they would grant no new licences this year.
Folkestone Express
13-2-1904
Annual Licensing Meeting
Wednesday, February 10th: Before W. Wightwick
Esq., Lieut. Col. Hamilton, Lieut.
Col. Fynmore, Lieut. Colonel Westropp, and W.G. Herbert, E.T. Ward, and
C.J. Pursey Esqs.
The following was the report of Supt. Reeve: Chief
Constable`s Office, Folkestone, 10th February, 1904. To the Chairman
and Members of the Licensing Committee of the Borough of Folkestone. Gentlemen,
I have the honour to report for your information that there are at present
within your jurisdiction 139 premises licensed for the sale of intoxicating
liquors, namely: Full licences 87; Beer on 11; Beer off 6; Beer and Spirits
(dealers) 16; Grocers 12; Confectioners 3; Chemists 4; Total 139 – an average
of one licence to every 220 persons, or one “on” licence to every 313. This is
a decrease of one full licence as compared with last year`s return, the licence
of the Marquis Of Lorne having been refused at the adjourned meeting in March.
Twenty of the licences have been transferred during the year, namely, 14 full
licences, two beer on, two beer off, and two grocers. One beer off licence was
transferred twice during the year. One licence holder has been convicted since
the last annual meeting of committing drunkenness on his licensed premises. He
has since transferred his licence and left the house. The alterations which the
Justices at the adjourned meeting last year directed to be made to the Packet Boat,
Castle, Tramway, Bricklayers` Arms, Granville, and Star Inns have all been
carried out in a satisfactory manner, and none of the licensed houses are now
used as common lodging houses. Ten occasional licences, and extensions of hours
on 21 occasions, have been granted to licence holders during the year. There
are 14 places licensed for music and dancing, and two for public billiard
playing. Eleven clubs where intoxicating liquors are sold are registered in
accordance with the Licensing Act of 1902. For the year ending 31st
December last year, 154 persons (131 males and 23 females) were proceeded
against for drunkenness. 131 were convicted and 23 discharged. This is an
increase of 65 persons proceeded against, and 51 convicted, as compared with
1902. The increase is chiefly due to the additional powers given to the police
under the Licensing Act, 1902. Up to the present time no person within the
Borough has been convicted the necessary number of times within the 12 months
to be placed on the “black list” as provided by Section 6 of the Act of 1902.
With very few exceptions the whole of the licensed houses have been conducted
in a satisfactory manner. The only objection I have to make to the renewal of
any of the present licences is that of the Swan Inn, Dover Road, and I would
ask that the renewal of this licence be deferred until the adjourned meeting. I
have the honour to be, gentlemen, your obedient servant, H. Reeve (Chief
Constable).
The Chairman: I think, gentlemen, you will agree that the
report of the Superintendent is a satisfactory one – in fact, I may say very
satisfactory – for the whole year. With your permission I well read the report
we now make to you. At the adjournment of the last general licensing meeting we
stated that in our opinion the number of licences for the sale of intoxicating
liquor then existing in the borough of Folkestone, especially in the part of
the immediate neighbourhood of the Harbour, was out of all proportion to the
population, and that we proposed between then and the general annual licensing
meeting of this year to obtain information on various matters, to enable us to
determine what reduction would be made in the number of licences. We invited
the owners of licensed houses in the meantime to meet and agree among themselves
for the voluntary surrender at this general meeting of a substantial number of
licences in the borough, and to submit the result of their united action to the
Licensing Justices for acceptance. Failing any satisfactory proposal for
reduction by the owners, the Licensing Justices last year intimated that in the
exercise of their discretionary powers they would at this year`s meeting decide
in a fair and equitable spirit what reduction should be made. But at the
opening of Parliament last week it was announced in the King`s speech that the
Government intended to introduce in the House of Commons during the present
session a Bill to amend the Licensing Laws. In view of this legislation we are
of opinion we ought not, pending the passage of this Bill through Parliament,
exercise the discretionary powers vested in us, and take measures for effecting
a further reduction in the number of licences within the borough on the ground
that certain licensed premises are not required for the public accommodation.
We have recently inspected certain houses known as the Imperial Brewery Tap,
the Hope, East Cliff Tavern, Victoria, Lifeboat, Duke Of Edinburgh, Railway
Tavern, and Channel Inn.
As to the East Cliff Tavern, there is a back entrance from a
yard in the rear of the licensed premises to a public way, which renders it difficult
for the police to have proper supervision over the business carried on upon the
premises. We therefore direct that the holder of the licence shall, within
fourteen days from this date, close the back entrance from the yard to the
public way. We also object to a portion of the licensed premises being sub-let
to lodgers.
Folkestone
Daily News 20-6-1906
Wednesday, June 20th: Before Messrs.
Herbert, Leggett, and Pursey.
The licence of the East Cliff Tavern was transferred from
Martin G. Griggs to E.F. Price.
Folkestone Express
23-6-1906
Wednesday, June 20th: Before W.G. Herbert Esq.,
Major Leggett, and C.J. Pursey Esq.
The Magistrates granted temporary authority to Martin Gray
Price to sell at the East Cliff Tavern.
Folkestone Herald
23-6-1906
Wednesday, June 20th: Before Alderman W.G.
Herbert, Mr. G.W. Pursey, and Major Leggett.
The licence of the East Cliff Tavern was temporarily transferred
from John Grigg to Martin Price, who was instructed by the Justices to keep the
back entrance closed.
Folkestone
Daily News 11-7-1906
Before Messrs. Hamilton, Fynmore, and Linton.
Licence Transfer
The East Cliff Tavern from Mr. Griggs to Mr. Price.
Folkestone Express
14-7-1906
Wednesday, July 11th: Before Lieut. Col. Fynmore,
Alderman Vaughan, and R.J. Linton Esq.
This being the day fixed for the special licensing sessions,
the following licence was transferred: The East Cliff Tavern, from Mr. J.
Griggs to Mr. Price.
Folkestone Herald
14-7-1906
Wednesday, July 11th: Before Councillor R.J. Fynmore,
Lieut. Colonel Hamilton, and Mr. Linton.
Licence was transferred as follows: The East Cliff Tavern,
from Mr. G.S. Grigg to Mr. Price.
Folkestone
Daily News 15-5-1907
Wednesday, May 15th:
Benjamin Mullett was summoned for obstructing the
highway with a horse and carriage.
P.C. Prebble said at 12.35 p.m. on Tuesday, the 11th
of May, he saw the horse and carriage standing near the East Cliff Tavern. He
kept it under observation, and at 1 o`clock he went to defendant and asked him
if he was in charge, and he replied “Yes”. Witness then told him he should
report him for obstruction.
Defendant said he went in the East Cliff Tavern while
the storm was on.
Fined 2s. 6d. and 9s. costs, or seven days`.
Folkestone
Express 18-5-1907
Wednesday, May 15th: Before Alderman Vaughan
and Lieut. Colonel Hamilton.
Benjamin Mullett was summoned for causing an
obstruction on East Cliff with a horse and carriage on May 7th.
P.C. Prebble said at 12.35 on May 7th he saw
a horse and carriage standing in the road near the East Cliff Tavern. He kept
it under observation until one o`clock. He then went into the East Cliff Tavern
and found the defendant inside. He asked him if he was in charge of the horse and
carriage, and he said he was.
Defendant said he was engaged, and he went into the
passage of the tavern as it was raining and squally at the time.
Fined 2s. 6d. and 9s. costs.
Folkestone
Herald 18-5-1907
Wednesday, May 15th: Before Alderman T.J.
Vaughan and Lieut. Col. Hamilton.
Benjamin Mullett pleaded Guilty to causing an
obstruction with a horse and cart.
P.C. Prebble deposed that about 12.35 p.m. on Tuesday,
7th inst., he saw a horse and cab standing in the road near the East
Cliff Tavern, East Cliff. Witness kept observation on it till one o`clock. He
then went to the East Cliff Tavern, and found defendant inside. He asked him if
he was in charge of the horse, and defendant said “Yes”.
Defendant said that he was engaged at the time.
The Chief Constable: In the public house?
P.C. Prebble said that defendant remained in the public
house all the time he had the horse under observation.
Fined 2s. 6d. and 9s. costs, or seven days`. Defendant
was allowed till today week to pay.
Folkestone
Daily News 22-5-1907
Wednesday, May 22nd: Before The Mayor,
Messrs. Herbert, Pursey, Stainer, Boyd, Swoffer, and Leggett.
William Hall was summoned for being drunk on licensed
premises, namely the East Cliff Tavern, on May the 7th. Defendant
pleaded Not Guilty. Mr. Mercer appeared for defendant.
Inspector Lilley deposed: On Tuesday, the 7th
inst., at 12.55 p.m. I saw P.C. Prebble in Radnor Bridge Road, and from a
statement he made to me I kept the East Cliff Tavern under observation till
1.30. Then, in company with him and P.C. Johnson, I went into the house by the
front door, where I saw defendant sitting in a chair with his back to the bar.
From his appearance I came to the conclusion that he had had too much to drink.
There was no-one behind the bar. I went through the passage and knocked, and
the landlord`s son came, and I asked him for his father. At that time the
landlord came in. I went to the bar again and said to Hall “I think you have
had too much to drink, and should advise you to get off the premises”. He rose
partly from the chair, and said “Do you think so?” I replied “Yes”. He said
“Then I don`t”. I went outside, and in a minute or two he came out with his
brother, followed by the landlord. He got into a hackney carriage, and said
“You are a piece of ---- ,you are. You are a ---- rotter. I know you of old”. I
said “I shall report you for being drunk on licensed premises”. He said “You
can do what you ---- well like”, and continued to swear till the carriage drove
away.
By Mr. Mercer: The police constables said nothing to
defendant.
Where were the other constables? – They followed me.
And you did the talking? – Yes.
He made a sensible remark when you told him he had had
enough? – Well, I should hardly call it sensible.
P.C. W. Prebble said: I saw the defendant in Dover Road
at eleven in the morning, and had a conversation with him and his brother.
Defendant was then under the influence of drink. I accompanied Inspector Lilley
on the day in question. I kept the East Cliff Tavern under observation from
12.30 to 1. I saw defendant sitting in the bar with his back to the counter.
Inspector Lilley called the landlord`s attention to defendant`s condition. The
landlord said ”He has only had one glass here”. I then went outside, and
shortly afterwards defendant came out and got into a trap that was waiting.
While Inspector Lilley was talking to defendant`s brother, defendant became
very excited and said to Lilley “You are a ---- rotter. I don`t care a ---- for
all three of you”.
Mr. Mercer: Why didn`t you lock him up? – There was no
need of it; he was in a trap.
How far is it from the door of the house to the trap? –
About three or four yards.
How many were in the bar? – Three or four, I believe.
Do you know their names? – No.
How long have you known the defendant? – A long time.
P.C. Johnson said: On the day in question I accompanied
Inspector Lilley and P.C. Prebble to the East Cliff Tavern. I had previously
seen defendant in the morning, and he was then in a drunken condition.
Defendant was in the bar of the East Cliff Tavern, and was decidedly drunk.
Mr. Mercer: You saw him in Dover Road in the morning,
didn`t you? – Yes.
How was he then? – Drunk.
Defendant was sworn, and in reply to Mr. Mercer, said:
I have lived in the town 25 years. On the day in question I went to see my
brother, who had been left sole executor of my father`s will. My brother
refused to see me, and threatened to give me into custody. I did not see the other
constable Johnson, but only Prebble. I afterwards went with my brother
Frederick to the East Cliff Tavern, and we had a bottle of ale together. We sat
down. My brother and I drank the ale. Inspector Lilley came in, and said “Are
the Halls here?”, and my brother replied “Yes, they are both here”. I had
ordered a cab to meet me there at 12.30. I didn`t like the idea of being told
by the Inspector that I was drunk, and I dare say I opened my mouth a little
too wide. The same evening I went to Rugby to do some work.
The Chief Constable: Haven`t you forgotten to tell the
Bench about another visit you paid to a certain house that same morning? – I
don`t think so.
Try and refresh your memory. – Well, I might have done.
Did you go into Mr. Southall`s? – Yes, I think I did.
And you went to your brother`s house? – Yes.
How many drinks had you altogether? – One at my
brother`s and one at the East Cliff Tavern.
Didn`t you have anything at Mr. Southall`s? – No, I
don`t think so.
You are not quite sure? – Yes, I am certain.
Mr. Mercer, on behalf of the defendant, said it was a
fact that defendant was very excitable on the day in question, and it was no
doubt due to a mistake by the police that the defendant was summoned. He was
labouring under very great excitement.
Frederick Hall deposed: I am the licensee of the
Wheatsheaf Inn, and on the 6th May we buried my father. On that day
we went to see my brother, who had been left sole legatee under my father`s
will. My brother refused to see us, and that made defendant very excited. I
spoke to P.C. Prebble about the family trouble, and said we did not want any
trouble. We afterwards went for a walk, and went to the East Cliff Tavern about
12.30. The police came there about 25 minutes after we got there. Lilley said to
my brother “I think you have had enough”, and my brother replied “Well I don`t,
and rather than make any bother in the man`s house, I`ll walk out”. He did so.
The Chief Constable: No-one accused you of being drunk?
– No.
Or anyone else? – No.
Do you think his excitement misled the police? – Yes, I
do.
Did you go into Mr. Southall`s during the morning? –
No.
Are you sure? – Yes, I don`t think we went there.
William Featherbe deposed: I was in the East Cliff
Tavern on the day in question with the defendant. I was in his company about 20
minutes, and we sat together. We talked about the ship Adriatic, and he gave me
the dimensions of her. He also told me about his family affairs. The police
came through the passage, and Lilley accused the landlord of having the Halls
drunk in his house. Defendant then walked out of the house and got into a
carriage that was waiting.
Joseph Lock, a seaman, deposed: I was in the East Cliff
Tavern on the 7th May. The defendant was also there, sitting about
two feet away from me. He had a glass of ale, which he did not finish. The
police came in, and one of them said “Is Hall in here?”, and the landlord said
“Yes”. The constable then said “I shall report him for being drunk on licensed
premises”. Hall then left the house and got into a carriage. He was not drunk.
This concluded the case, and the Magistrates then left
the Bench to consider their decision. On returning, Mr. Herbert, as Chairman,
said they had come to the conclusion that the charge had not been proved, and
the case would therefore be dismissed.
The case against the landlord was withdrawn.
Folkestone
Express 25-5-1907
Wednesday, May 22nd: Before The Mayor, W.G.
Herbert, C.J. Pursey, R.J. Linton, G. Boyd, J. Stainer, and G.I. Swoffer Esqs.
William Hall was summoned for being drunk on licensed
premises (East Cliff Tavern) on May 7th. Defendant pleaded Not
Guilty. Mr. R.M. Mercer appeared on defendant`s behalf.
Inspector Lilley said on Tuesday, the 7th
inst., at 12.55 noon, he saw P.C. Prebble in Radnor Bridge Road, and from a
communication he made to him he kept the East Cliff Tavern under observation
until a few minutes past one. Then, in company with P.C.s Prebble and Johnson,
he went into the house. In the bar he saw defendant sitting, and from his
appearance he came to the conclusion he had had too much to drink. There was
no-one behind the bar. The landlord subsequently came in through the front
door. Witness told defendant he thought he had had too much to drink, and
advised him to get off the premises. Defendant said “Do you think so?” Witness
replied “Yes”, and defendant said “Then I don`t”. Witness went outside and
defendant followed with his brother and the landlord. He got into a hackney
carriage and used abusive language. Witness told defendant he should report him
for being drunk on licensed premises. He had no doubt as to defendant`s
condition.
P.C. Prebble said on Tuesday, May 7th, about
11.15, he saw defendant in Dover Road with his brother. Witness had a
conversation with both of them. Defendant was under the influence of drink.
Later witness accompanied Inspector Lilley to the East Cliff Tavern. He had
previously kept observation on the house from 12.35 to one o`clock. On entering
the house witness saw defendant sitting in the bar. He heard Inspector Lilley
call the landlord`s attention to defendant`s condition. He heard the landlord
say that defendant had only had one glass of ale there. Witness then went
outside, and shortly afterwards defendant came out and got into a Victoria that
was waiting. While Inspector Lilley was talking to defendant`s brother,
defendant became very excited and used abusive language towards the Inspector.
Defendant was drunk.
P.C. H. Johnson said on May 7th, shortly
after eleven o`clock in the morning, he saw defendant and his brother in Dover
Street. Witness did not speak to them. Defendant was under the influence of
drink. About 1.15 the witness accompanied Inspector Lilley and P.C. Prebble to
the East Cliff Tavern, where he saw defendant sitting in the public bar. In his
other evidence witness corroborated the previous evidence.
Defendant then went into the witness box. He said he
had lived in the town twenty five years and was a builder. His brother kept the
Wheatsheaf. On May 7th he went to his brother`s and had a glass of
ale there. He had recently lost his father, and his youngest brother, Arthur,
was left sole executor and beneficiary of the will. Witness and his brother
Frederick went to the youngest brother`s house in Dover Road. There was an
argument, and witness`s brother said he would give him in charge. Later witness
and Frederick Hall went to the East Cliff Tavern, and Frederick Hall called for
a bottle of ale. They each had a glass. Witness did not drink all of his ale.
He had been in the bar about half an hour when the police came in. Witness
admitted he lost his temper, but he was not drunk and did not like being told
about it. He had never been drunk in his life. The same evening witness went to
Rugby.
Cross-examined, witness said he was perfectly sober.
When the constables came in he became excited.
Frederick Hall said he was the licensee of the
Wheatsheaf. He had been in the trade six years. On May 6th he buried
his father, and on May 7th witness, accompanied by defendant, went
to see his youngest brother about the will. Defendant became excited when his
brother said he would give him in charge. About a quarter to ten that morning
defendant had a glass of ale at witness`s house. At 12.30 they went into the
East Cliff Tavern The police entered about twenty five minutes afterwards.
Witness saw defendant walk to the cab, and he walked as straight as anyone.
William Edward Featherby, a ship`s carpenter, said he
was in the East Cliff Tavern on May 7th. He was in the bar at the
same time defendant was. Witness entered into conversation with defendant, and
his talk was quite rational. He was perfectly sober.
Joseph Lott, a seaman, who was in the East Cliff Tavern
on the day in question, said he heard defendant talking to Featherby, and he
was sober.
The Magistrates then retired, and on their return the
Chairman said the Bench were unanimously of the opinion that the case must be
dismissed. The police had acted perfectly fairly, but had mistaken excitement
for drunkenness.
The summons against Martin G. Price, the landlord of
the East Cliff Tavern, for permitting drunkenness, was withdrawn on the Chief
Constable`s application.
Folkestone
Herald 25-5-1907
Wednesday, May 22nd: Before Mr. W.G.
Herbert, Messrs. R.J. Linton, C.J. Pursey, J. Stainer, and Councillor G. Boyd.
Wm. Hall was summoned for being drunk on licensed
premises (the East Cliff Tavern). The Chief Constable prosecuted, and Mr. R.M.
Mercer represented the landlord (Mr. M.G. Price). Defendant pleaded Not Guilty.
All the witnesses were ordered to leave the Court until called upon.
Inspector Lilley deposed that on Tuesday, May 17th,
at 12.55 noon, he saw P.C. Prebble in Radnor Bridge Road, and from a
communication he made to witness, he kept the East Cliff Tavern, East Cliff,
under observation till three minutes past one. Then, in company with P.C.
Prebble and P.C. Johnson, he went into the house. In the front of the bar he
saw defendant, sitting with his back to the bar, in a chair. From his
appearance, witness came to the conclusion that he had had too much to drink.
There was no-one behind the bar. Witness went through the passage to the
entrance door behind the bar, and knocked. At that moment the landlord came in
the front door from the street. Witness went back to the front bar again, and
said to Hall “I think you have had too much to drink; I should advise you to
get off the premises”. He rose partly up out of the chair, and said “Do you
think so?” Witness replied “Yes”. He said “Then I don`t”. Witness went outside,
and in a minute or two defendant came out with his brother, followed by the
landlord. He got into a waiting hackney carriage, and said “You are a nice lot
of ---- you are. You are a ---- rotter; I know you of old”. Witness said “I
shall report you for being drunk on licensed premises”. He said “You can do
what you ---- well like”. He continued to swear until the carriage drove away.
He had no doubt at all as to the defendant`s condition; Hall was drunk.
Cross-examined by Mr. Mercer: The constables were not
with him all the time in the house. They came in after him. He thought it was a
proof of drunkenness for a man to say to three police officers “You can do what
you like”.
P.C. Prebble deposed that on the 7th May,
about 11.15 a.m., he saw defendant fall in the Dover Road. He was then with his
brother. Witness had a conversation with both. Defendant at that time was very
much under the influence of drink. Witness later accompanied Inspector Lilley
to the East Cliff Tavern. He had been keeping observation on the house from
12.35 to one o`clock. Defendant did not enter the house during that time. On
entering the public bar witness saw defendant sitting there with his back to
the counter. He heard the landlord say to Inspector Lilley “He has only had one
glass of ale here”. Witness then went outside. Shortly afterwards he saw
defendant come out, and get into a Victoria which was waiting outside. While
Inspector Lilley was talking to defendant`s brother, who came out with
defendant, defendant became very excited, and said to Inspector Lilley “I know
you Inspector; you are a ---- rotter. I don`t care a ---- for all three of you.
Do as you like”. There was no doubt that defendant was drunk.
Cross-examined:
He did not see any need to arrest the man. If he had been in the road
instead of in the trap he would have done so. Defendant stepped into the
Victoria without assistance.
P.C. H. Johnson also stated that defendant was drunk.
Cross-examined: He saw P.C. Prebble talking to
defendant in the Dover Road. Witness was standing in the middle of the road,
and could not hear what the conversation was about. He thought defendant was
drunk at that time, because his face was flushed, and his voice was excited,
and he was moving his hands about.
This concluded the case for the prosecution.
Defendant, on oath, said he had lived in the town about
twenty five years, and was a builder. One of his brothers – Frederick – kept
the Wheatsheaf Inn. On the 7th May he left home to go to his brother
Fred`s, and had one glass of ale there. He then went, in company with
Frederick, to see his other brother, Arthur, who lived in the Dover Road.
Witness`s father had recently died, and Arthur was the sole executor and beneficiary
under his will. He and his brother Frederick did not think that was right, and
they were going round to see Arthur about it. Arthur would not see them, and
told him (defendant) that if he did not leave his door he would give him in
charge of a constable. He was very excited over the will, and had some
conversation with P.C. Prebble about it. That was between 11.30 and 12. Witness
then had a walk round, and afterwards went to the East Cliff Tavern with his
brother Fred. There Frederick called for a bottle of ale, and defendant and his
brother halved it. Each had one glass. The landlord supplied the bottle.
Witness sat down when he went into the house. Defendant`s brother took the ale
and poured it out, handing defendant his, but he (defendant) “did not drink
more than about a couple of inches”. He was talking to Mr. Featherbe about the
new White Star liner when the constable entered. There were several other
people in the bar at the time. Witness had been in there about twenty minutes
or half an hour before the police entered. Inspector Lilley said “Are the Halls
here?”, and witness`s brother said “We are both here”. Witness got out of his
chair and walked straight out, without staggering; nobody assisted him. He had
ordered a cab to wait outside, and he got into it. Defendant did not like being
accused of being drunk when he was not, so he lost his temper, and, he was
afraid, opened his mouth a bit too wide. Witness had never been accused of
drunkenness before. The same evening he went on to Rugby to some work he had to
do there.
Cross-examined by the Chief Constable: He did not think
he and his brother Fred called at another house before going to see Arthur. He
was pretty sure they did not.
The Chief Constable: May I refresh your memory. Did you
not go to Mr. Southall`s?
Witness (after hesitation): Perhaps we did. Yes we did.
Continuing, he said that when the police officers entered the house, they
accused nobody of being drunk. Outside they said they should report him. They
did not accuse anybody else of being drunk. He did not know why they picked on
him. The sight of the three policemen excited him, and frightened him. He
thought he should get into trouble. Perhaps the policemen mistook his
excitement over that and his family trouble for the effects of drink. He had
only been in his brother`s house before that morning. He had had one glass
there, and one at the East Cliff. That was all he had had that morning. He did
not think he had any at Mr. Southall`s; he was certain of that.
Mr. Mercer then briefly addressed the Bench, drawing
particular attention to the rational answers of defendant to Inspector Lilley
in the bar. With regard to the evidence of P.C. Johnson as to defendant`s
condition in the Dover Road, he said it was simply ridiculous to say that, from
the middle of the road, he was such an experienced man that he could tell from
the defendant`s gestures, colour, and tone of voice – although he could not
hear what he was saying – that he was drunk. Nobody would hang a dog on such
evidence. After referring to the fact that defendant had had family troubles
with regard to the will, which had excited him, Mr. Mercer proceeded to call
further witnesses.
Frederick Hall, brother of the defendant, said he was
licensee of the Wheatsheaf Inn. On the 7th inst. witness and
defendant went to see their younger brother about the will. When they got there
Arthur said that if defendant did not go away he would give him in charge. That
made defendant very excited. Defendant came into witness`s licensed house at
10.15, and had a glass of ale only. Then they went out together. After they
left Dover Road, they went over Radnor Bridge to the cliff for a walk, and then
to the East Cliff Tavern. They got there about 12.30. The police came in about
twenty five minutes later. Witness then corroborated defendant`s evidence as to
what took place then. His brother walked quite straight to the cab, and was
perfectly sober.
Cross-examined: No-one accused witness of being drunk.
He supposed that the excitement as to the family trouble misled the police to
think that his brother was drunk. He had no recollection of himself and his
brother going into Mr. Southall`s.
Wm. Edward Featherbe, a ships` carpenter, said that he
was in the East Cliff Tavern at the time in question. He was in defendant`s
company about twenty minutes, sitting by him. He talked to defendant about
ship-building in Liverpool. The latter was giving witness dimensions of a new
liner – the Adriatic. He was perfectly sober. Defendant was quoting figures as
to the size of the ship, and spoke quite rationally. When the police entered
Inspector Lilley accused the landlord of having “the Halls” drunk on the
premises. Defendant walked out perfectly straight; there was no sign of
staggering.
Joseph Lopp, seaman, said he was in the East Cliff
Tavern at the time in question. He saw defendant and some other people there.
He was sitting about two feet from defendant, who had a bottle of ale to drink,
but did not drink a whole glassful. The talking was quiet, and there was no
disturbance. Defendant was sober, and walked straight.
Cross-examined: Defendant was a little bit excited in
the bar when the police came.
The Magistrates then retired to consider their verdict,
and, returning after a brief absence, the Chairman said that the Bench were
unanimously of the opinion that the case must be dismissed. They considered
that the police had acted perfectly fairly, but mistook excitement for drink.
There was slight applause in the Court at this
decision.
The Chief Constable then asked permission to withdraw
the summons against the landlord for permitting drunkenness, and he was allowed
to do so.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)